In general, the analysis of published research is essential for defining the current progress related to a particular issue. A peer-reviewed article written by Rogers et al. (2023) that will be summarized in this paper addresses potential associations between primary school children’s obesity prevalence and a soft drinks industry levy (SDIL) announced and implemented in the United Kingdom. The rationale of this research is determined by a highly disturbing global issue of overweight and obesity, specifically among children and adolescents.
In the present day, there are multiple studies dedicated to the analysis of this problem and proposed solutions. Thus, according to Magriplis et al. (2021, p. 2), in the present day, childhood obesity may be regarded as of the most significant public health issues as its prevalence “nearly tripled from 4% in 1975 to over 18% in 2016 worldwide with 124 million children and adolescents aged 5–19 years old being classified as obese and 213 million as overweight in 2017.” Obesity is frequently associated with increased sugar consumption in the format of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSB), including fruit and energy drinks, and soda. He et al. (2018, p. 82) state that “an extra cup of SSB per day would increase the risk of obesity by 1.6 times in American children aged 11.7 years on average.” Meanwhile, due to globalization, economic growth, cultural penetration, and shifts in lifestyle and diet, SSB consumption continuously grows even in countries in which it is culturally untypical.
At the same time, excessive sugar intake is the cause of multiple negative health consequences. A prevalent number of studies report the association between obesity caused by SSB consumption and various cardiovascular disorders, dental caries, the risk of type 2 diabetes, and fatty liver disease (Bleich and Vercammen, 2018). However, while modern children generally consume “nearly twice as many calories from SSBs than they did 30 years ago,” there are factors that nevertheless impact the rates of intake (Yoshida and Simoes, 2018, p. 2). Thus, the members of lower income and education populations from deprived areas demonstrate higher SSB consumption. Therefore, the issue and already implemented solutions require immediate response and evaluation, respectively, in order to ensure positive outcomes in the future.
The purpose of an identified study is to assess the impact of SDIL on obesity prevalence among primary school children. In general, in the United Kingdom, children and adolescents may be regarded as high consumers of beverages with added sugars. As a result, in 2016, the government introduced the two-tier SDIL as a measure of the reduction of sugar in soft drinks for the prevention of obesity (Rogers et al., 2023). According to it, manufacturers, bottlers, and importers are responsible for paying a charge of £0.24 per liter on SSB, which contain ≥8 g of sugar per 100 ml, £0.18 per liter on SSB, which contain between ≥5 to <8 g of sugar per 100 ml, and no levy on SSB, which contain <5 g sugar per 100 ml (Rogers et al., 2023). As a result, the SDIL led the reformulation of soft drinks which contain higher sugar to decrease tax pressure. Moreover, according to the UK government, all revenues raised through these regulations are spent on schools’ nutrition, after-class activities, and physical education.
The method used for the research is the interrupted time series (ITS) analysis. Information required for it reflects monthly obesity prevalence from September 2013 to November 2019 (Rogers et al., 2023). Population level data were collected from the National Child Measurement Programme (NCMP), which has surveilled and measured the physical parameters of almost 1 million primary school students annually since 2006 (Rogers et al., 2023). In addition, data related to children with obesity or overweight were classified in accordance with sex, the month of measurement, school class and year, and the index of multiple deprivation (IMD) referred to the school’s location (Rogers et al., 2023).
All in all, the required obesity prevalence data covers the periods between September 2013 and November 2019 to define whether the SDIL introduced in 2018 caused “absolute and relative changes in obesity prevalence compared to a counterfactual (adjusted for temporal variations in obesity prevalence) estimated from the trend prior to SDIL announcement” (Rogers et al., 2023, p. 1). In addition, the parameters of students’ sex and an area’s deprivation quintile were considered to assess the possibility of their influence on the overall statistics.
The results of this study may be regarded as considerably controversial. On the one hand, the comparison of factual and expected obesity levels demonstrates particular changes (Rogers et al., 2023). In addition, according to the findings, new regulations and a related reformulation of high-sugar soft drinks are associated with an approximately 8% of reduction in obesity levels – it is equivalent to the prevention of more than 5,200 cases of childhood obesity per year (Rogers et al., 2023).
On the other hand, positive outcomes are demonstrated only by girls aged 10-11 years, especially from deprived areas. At the same time, no associations between obesity prevalence in boys, regardless of age, and the SDIL were detected. Therefore, while the research demonstrates the presence of relationships between childhood obesity prevalence and governmental regulations that force manufacturers to reduce the amount of sugar in soft drinks, the latter’s efficiency may be limited by a particular population group. That is why further strategies should be developed and introduced in order to ensure more substantial results and reduce obesity prevalence in younger children and older boys as well.
In general, the study’s findings do not contradict previous research. First of all, they support the existence of an association between SSB and obesity among children described in the scientific literature. In addition, the received results aligned with a previously reported relationship between the SDIL and sugar consumption from SSB across the population. Moreover, they are consistent with similar studies conducted in other countries – for instance, the 10% increase in SSB price in Mexico results in the reduction of obesity prevalence in girls and no associations with boy’s weight (Rogers et al., 2023). Therefore, received data may be applied to the development of strategies for the reduction of obesity prevalence in adults as well.
At the same time, the reliability of the findings may be impacted by economic factors rather than nutritional ones, especially considering the fact that children from deprived areas demonstrate the most significant decrease in obesity prevalence. For instance, due to the growth of SSB prices caused by the SDIL, lower-income households may refuse to buy soft drinks at all in favor of more essential products. In addition, an absence of difference in the results of children aged 6 regardless of sex and its appearance with time may demonstrate cultural impact on nutrition. In other words, older girls may lower the consumption of SSB by choosing healthier nutrition for esthetics and physical well-being.
Reference List
Bleich, S. N. and Vercammen, K. A. (2018) ‘The negative impact of sugar-sweetened beverages on children’s health: an update of the literature.’ BMC Obesity, 5(1), pp. 1-27. Web.
He, B. et al. (2018) ‘Sugar-sweetened beverages consumption positively associated with the risks of obesity and hypertriglyceridemia among children aged 7–18 years in South China.’ Journal of Atherosclerosis and Thrombosis, 25(1), pp. 81-89.
Magriplis, E. et al. (2021) ‘Dietary sugar intake and its association with obesity in children and adolescents.’ Children, 8(676), pp. 1-14. Web.
Rogers, N. T. et al. (2023) ‘Associations between trajectories of obesity prevalence in English primary school children and the UK soft drinks industry levy: an interrupted time series analysis of surveillance data.’ PLoS Medicine, 20(1), pp. 1-18. Web.
Yoshida, Y. and Simoes, E. J. (2018) ‘Sugar-sweetened beverage, obesity, and type 2 diabetes in children and adolescents: policies, taxation, and programs.’ Current Diabetes Reports, 18, pp. 1-10. Web.